Referanslar

• Abildgaard, J. S., Saksvik, P. O. and Nielsen, K. M. (2016). How to Measure the Intervention Process? An Assessment of Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches to Data Collection in the Process Evaluation of Organizational Interventions. Frontiers in Psychology, (7), 1380. google scholar
• Adcock, R., and Collier, D. (2001). Measurement Validity: A Shared Standard for Qualitative and Quantitative Research. American Political Science Review, (95), 529-546. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3118231 google scholar
• Adler, E. (2005). Communitarian International Relations: The Epistemic Foundations of International Relations. London: Routledge. google scholar
• Ahram, A. I. (2013). Concepts and Measurement in Multimethod Research. Political Research Quarterly 66(2), 280-291. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912911427453 google scholar
• Angrist, J. D., and Pischke, J. (2009). Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist’s Companion. Princeton: Princeton University Press. google scholar
• Aydın-Çakır , A. and Türkeş-Kılıç, S. (2021). Bilimsel Çalışmalarda Karma Yöntem Nasıl Kullanılır? (How to Use Mixed-Method in Scientific Studies?), Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi (Journal of Pamukkale University Social Sciences Institute), 42 (Special Issue 1). google scholar
• Bamberger, M., Rao,V. and Woolcock, M. (2010). Using Mixed Methods in Monitoring and Evaluation. In: A. Tashakkoriand C. Teddlie, (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social Behavioral Research, (2nd ed.), (pp. 613-641). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications., google scholar
• Barnes, B. R. (2019). Transformative Mixed Methods Research in South Africa: Contributions to Social Justice. In S. Laher, A. Fynn and S. Kramer (Eds.), Transforming Research Methods in the Social Sciences: Case Studies from South Africa, (pp. 303-316). Johannesburg: Wits University Press. google scholar
• Bennett, A. (2008). Process Tracing: A Bayesian Perspective. In J. M. Box-Steffensmeier, H. E. Brady, and D. Collier, (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Political Methodology, (pp. 702-721). Oxford: Oxford University Press. google scholar
• Bennett, A., and Checkel, J. T. (2015). Process Tracing: From Metaphor to Analytic Tool. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. google scholar
• Biesenbender, S. and Heritier, A. (2014). Mixed-Methods Designs in Comparative Public Policy Research: The Dismantling of Pension Policies. In I. Engeli and C. Rothmayr Allison (Eds.), Comparative policy studies: conceptual and methodological challenges, (pp. 237-264). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. google scholar
• Brady, H. E. and Collier, D. (2010). Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards. New York, NY: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. google scholar
• Carr, E. H. (2001). Twenty Years’ Crisis 1919-1939. M. Cox (Ed.). London: Palgrave Macmillan. google scholar
• Cox, R. W. (1981). Social forces, states and world orders: beyond international relations theory. Millennium, 10(2), 126-155. https://doi.org/10.1177/03058298810100020501 google scholar
• Creswell, J. W., Plano, C. G., & Clark, G. M., & Hanson, W.(2003). Advances in Mixed Methods Design. In Tashakori, A., Teddlie, C.(Eds), handbook in mixed methods design in social & behavioural research. google scholar
• De Juan , A. and Pierskalla, J. (2014). Civil war violence and political trust: Microlevel evidence from Nepal. Conflict Management and Peace Science, (33)1. 10.1177/0738894214544612 google scholar
• Dunning, T. (2007). The Role of Iteration in Multi-Method Research, Qualitative Methods, (Newsletter of the American Political Science Association’s Organized Section on Qualitative Methods), 5(1), 22-24. google scholar
• Fielding, N. and Cisneros-Puebla, C. (2009). CAQDAS-GIS convergence: Toward a new integrated mixed method research practice? Journal of Mixed Methods Research, (3):4, 349-370. 10.1177/1558689809344973 google scholar
• Gerring, J. (2012). Social Science Methodology: A Unified Framework. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. google scholar
• Greene, J. C., & Caracelli, V. J. (1997). Defining and describing the paradigm issue in mixed-method evaluation. New directions for evaluation, 74, 5-17. google scholar
• Greenhill, B. and Straus, M. (2014). Explaining nonratification of the genocide convention: A nested analysis, Foreign Policy Analysis, 10(4), 371-391. 10.1111/fpa.12013 google scholar
• Harbers, I. and Ingram, M. C. (2020). Mixed-Methods Designs. In L. Curini and R. Franzese, (Eds.), The Handbook of Research Methods in Political Science and International Relations, (Chp. 58) (p. 1117). London: Sage Publications. google scholar
• Jick, T. D. (1979). Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action. Administrative science quarterly, 24(4), 602-611. google scholar
• Johnson, R. B. and Onwuegbuzie, J. O. (2004). Mixed Methods Research: A Research Paradigm Whose Time Has Come. American Educational Research Association, 33(7), 14-26. https://doi. org/10.3102/0013189X033007014 google scholar
• Kapur, S. P. (2007). Dangerous deterrent: Nuclear weapons proliferation and conflict in South Asia, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. google scholar
• Kaplan, M. A. (1966). The new great debate: Traditionalism vs. science in international relations. World Politics 19(1), 1-20. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2009840?origin=JSTOR-pdf google scholar
• Keohane, R. O. (1988). American Political Science Association (APSA) Speech. Washington, D.C.: The APSA Annual Meeting. google scholar
• Kurki M., and Wight C. (2016). International Relations and Social Science. In T. Dunne, M. Kurki and S. Smith (Eds.), International Relations Theories: Discipline and Diversity (p.13). Oxford: Oxford University Press. google scholar
• Kwan, M. and Ding, G. (2008). Geo-Narrative: Extending Geographic Information Systems for Narrative Analysis in Qualitative and Mixed-Method Research *. The Professional Geographer, 60(4), 443-465. https://doi.org/10.1080/00330120802211752 google scholar
• Mansfield, E. D., and Snyder, J. (2005). Electing to fight: Why emerging democracies go to war, Cambridge: MIT Press. google scholar
• Matthews, S. A., Detwiler, J. E. and Burton, L. M. (2005). Geo-ethnography: coupling geographic information analysis techniques with ethnographic methods in urban research. Cartographica: The International Journal for Geographic Information and Geovisualization, (40)4, 75-90. 10.3138/2288-1450-W061-R664 google scholar
• Morse, J. M. (2010). Simultaneous and Sequential Qualitative Mixed Method Designs. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(6), 483-491. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800410364741 google scholar
• Popper, K. R. (2002). The Logic of Scientific Inquiry. London: Routledge. google scholar
• Rathbun, B. C., Kertzer J. D. and Paradis, M. (2017). Homo Diplomaticus: Mixed-Method Evidence of Variation in Strategic Rationality. International Organization, 71(1), 33-60. doi:10.1017/S0020818316000412 google scholar
• Sammons, P. (2010). The contribution of mixed methods to recent research on educational effectiveness. In A. Tashakkori and C. Teddlie (Eds.), Sage Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioural research, (2nd ed) (pp.697-723). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. google scholar
• Strange, S. (2015). States and markets. New York, NY: Bloomsbury Publishing. google scholar
• Süleymanoğlu-Kürüm, R. (2018). Conditionality, the EU and Turkey: From Transformation to Retrenchment, London: Routledge. google scholar
• Tashakkori, A. and Teddlie, C. (2010). SAGE Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research. London: Sage Publications. google scholar
• Teddlie, C. and Tashakkori, A. (2009). Foundations of Mixed Methods Research: Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. London: Sage Publications. google scholar
• van Trigt, C. (1997). Visual system-response functions and estimating reflectance, J. Opt. Soc. Am. A, (14), 741-755. google scholar
• Weaver-Hightower, M. B. and Skelton, C. (Eds.) (2013). Leaders in gender and education: Intellectual self-portraits. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. google scholar
• Yeager, C. D. and Steiger, T. (2013). Applied geography in a digital age: The case for mixed methods. Applied Geography, (39), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2012.12.001 google scholar

Atıflar